tv America Live FOX News March 7, 2013 10:00am-12:00pm PST
[ male announcer ] get adt installed for just $99. and ask about adt pulse, advanced home management here today. adt. always there. >> have you ever been on a whale watch? >> yes, love it. >> did you hit it on a good day where you saw a lot of whales. >> couple i did, not-- >> that's typical, sometimes you get lucky on a whale watch and sometimes you don't. these folks got lucky, a gray whale off the california coast breaching the surface, the energetic whale jumps not once, twice, but five times, a bit of a showoff, and spore the spectators and for us, didn't have to go. >> and close to the shore. time for cozy cuteness, right? >> only for you, jon. >> yeah. not hardly. three little koalas getting
their first check up at the san diego zoo. bradley, simba and bj just arrived by way of, where else, australia. cute little critters will stay in isolation for a month before they get to join the other koalas at the zoo. >> oh. >> pretty cute, but long nails, got to be careful. >> yeah. >> thanks for joining us, everybody. >> "america live" starts right n now. >> megyn: fox news alert, on new fallout from a historic moment on the floor of the u.s. senate. welcome to "america live" everyone, i'm megyn kelly. it started just over 24 hours ago and you saw it here. kentucky senator rand paul staging an old-fashioned senate filibuster for nearly 13 hours straight. start paul remained on the senate floor, trying to block the nomination of president obama's pick to lead the cia, john branbrenen, trying to see
when and if they would use drones to kill u.s. citizens on u.s. soil. >> i rise today to begin to filibuster john brennan's nomination to the cia. i will speak until i can no longer speak. i will speak as long as it takes until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast. and i would go for another 12 hours to try to break strom thurmon's record and i found out there are limits to filibustering and i'm going to take care of one of those in a few minutes here. the senator yielded and a bipartisan show of support that ignored the senate rule and celebrated this remarkable moment. >> thank you very much for thefoth the forebearance ap i yield
the floor. >> (applause) essions of approvr disapproval are not allowed in the senate. [applause] >> they've got a great sense of humor, don't they? chris stirewalt, host of power play on foxnews.com live, there will be no point of any kind in the u.s. senate, rand paul eating the candy bar is the only fun tonight. do i make that clear. >> don't look like you're enjoying it as you're eating the milky way, not a fun lovi fun-loving bunch. >> megyn: what was this about. >> fortunately for rand paul it was clearly explainable, clearly principled and a lot of people in both parties tend to agree with him on. the federal government under the the obama administration has gotten rather casual about what authority it has to kill people, including americans where and when, and that's
something that dakts usemocrats to have knickers in a knot over and in the age of obama slippery on that point and that's rand paul going out speaking for a broadening swath of republicans who say, wait a minute, we need some clarity and we need some answers about which americans the president can kill at which time without trying to subject them to trial. >> megyn: he wanted to know about, you know, what americans could be killed on u.s. soil. he said what, you can be sitting in a cafe and bombed by the government, you could be james bonded, bombed by the government and that hasn't happened. and in fact, we'll only killed intentionally one american terrorist abroad, not in the united states, anwar al-awlaki although there's been collateral damage overseas in the effort to pick up al-qaeda terrorists. why the 12, you know, 13-hour filibuster on an issue that right now is hypothetical? because a lot of the papers are speculating, chris, this is about rand paul and 2016
and not necessarily president obama in 2013. >> well, look, it's not something that anybody would undertake specifically for a presidential run. that isn't to say that it's not good politics and you can certainly say that rand paul's presidential campaign for 2016 got a good start yesterday as he won admiration, bipartisan style, as he did something that you very seldom get to see in washington anymore which is somebody take a chance, take a risk on principle and do something. people admire that. people like that and it's so rare in washington to see somebody do that. now, you see today that republicans like lindsey graham and john mccain are making rand paul pay the price for what happened. >> megyn: they are not happy at all. they think his behavior was offensive and insulting and raising an issue they don't think is a real one and demeans the presidency by suggesting that he would at random kill americans sitting in a cafe.
>> and i might submit that that's the reason rand paul was where he was last night and why senator graham was where he was last night dining with the president. you don't get access, don't get influence, don't get to be part of the discussion behind closed doors in washington d.c. making a stink, being the skunk at the garden party, like rand paul did. however, rand paul can count this on his side. the american people didn't like washington and didn't like cut out of the process that this new brand of populous libertarian style of populace in the republican party may have currency and may make him a contending for 2016. >> megyn: you look out the window behind you and literally we're expecting to see the pigs fly. what he did last night. he had john cornyn, ted cruz, marco rubio standing besides him cheering him on as well as the aclu and code pink, code pink, chris. >> you've got it. anytime--
what rand paul managed to do was forge a brief alliance that went from democrats, ron wyden from oregon, senator, to ted cruz, very libertarian from texas and held the establishment figures like his fellow republican senator from texas, minority leader mitch mcconnell and others, though in softer tone, stood with him and stood behind him on this issue because he forced them to choose between a romantic moment, this mr. smith moment, and business as usual in washington and he put together for a minute an interesting coalition. >> megyn: i love that as we're talking about his romantic moment, the milky way is falling out of his mouth and finger in the ear and the match up didn't work out well. >> we have a lower threshold for romanticism here in washington than do you in new york. >> megyn: i'll talk to your wife about that. chris, thank you. >> you bet. >> megyn: and we're not done yet. in our next hour, senator paul
will join me live and you need to see this interview. i'm going to ask him all about these issues, about the reaction from other senators like mccain and graham, who say well, and this is a quote, actually, senator paul did a disservice to a lot of americans yesterday. they, that's how they feel. these are republicans. we're going to ask senator rand paul about that plus, why he decided to stage the filibuster and what he's hoping to get out of it. that all happens live less than an hour from right now. hope you're sticking around from for all that. we are tracking a developing story after north korea threatens a preemptive nuclear strike on the united states, on the same day the u.n. approved new sanctions against north korea. all this comes just weeks after some bizarre propaganda from north korea went viral. look. ♪
oh, the north koreans, he they know how to have fun. the video shows a man sleeping and dreaming of an attack on the united nations with the song "we are the world" playing in the background. jonathan hunt in the news room. you can see why dennis rodman has such an affinity for the north koreans and their leader. >> divorced from carman eelectra and from reality in the case of dennis rodman, a new round of sanctions from the u.n. and what they're clearly aiming to do is to stop the north koreans using diplomatic cover, diplomatic immunity to import and export nuclear technology and the vast amount of cash that goes along with those trades. they're calling on the member nations to actually stop and inspect any suspicious cargo, whether that be on a ship or
on a plane and these are, according to the u.s. ambassador to the u.n., susan rice some of the toughest sanctions the united nations security council has ever passed. >> the strength, breadth and severity of these sanctions will raise the cost to north korea of its illicit nuclear program and further con strain its ability to finance and source materials and technology for its ballistic missile, conventional and nuclear weapons program. >> reporter: now, significantly, china has signed on to the security council resolution, but equally significantly, you have to watch their actions. approving the language of a resolution is very different to actually enforcing that resolution and that's what the u.s. and others will now want to see the chinese do. because they have a lot of power over north korea. then there are these north korean threats coming from the
regime of kim jong un to launch the nuclear preemptive strikes as north korean officials call them. frankly, megyn, nobody is taking those very seriously. frankly, while north korea does have a long range missile that could possibly reach hawaii or even alaska, it does not yet have the technology to put a nuclear warhead on that missile. that's not to say the threats are being dismissed entirely because obviously there are other ways of attacking the united states. but the video you just showed, the missile launches they have done, the nuclear tests they've carried out, all are not meaningful right now because they're moving towards a nuclear weapon that can reach the u.s. they do not have it. most experts will tell you, they are at least two years away from achieving that technology, megyn. >> megyn: all right. jonathan, thank you. well, new questions today about whether what some are calling the president's 2014 mid term election strategy may
have just back fired. today we'll look at the media pushback on the exaggerations over these budget changes that kicked in last week. the president's falling poll numbers, and the change of tone from his administration. see where this might lead. plus, look at a bill in the florida legislature that aims to cut down on gun violence by requiring anger management classes for anyone who wants to buy ammunition. dr. keith ablow joins us on whether this is common sense or crazy. an investigation is underway the at one of the best known colleges after a series of reports emerges about hate speech and vandalism, and alleged racism on campus. but well-known overland grad michelle malkin, that's where it's happening, thinks there is something else entirely going on here and she'll join us live on that next. >> a water fountain, you know, vandalized with the words whites only, or again, more, more uses of the n-word
>> some mixed news on america's jobs crisis today. a report from america's biggest employers shows the number of planned layoffs is spiking for the second month in a row. a new report says employers announced more than 40,000 job cuts in january. that number jumped to more than 55,000 in february. that's a 37% increase in a month. this morning, however, the labor department announced michigan claims for unemployment benefits to actually fell last week by 7,000, and we get the february monthly numbers tomorrow and those will get a better idea of what's going on with the jobs picture. well there's an investigation underway right now about one of the nation's best known colleges. after a month long series of reports about alleged hate speech, racism, and vandalism on the campus. the story is capturing the
attention of some separate celebrity alums, including the well-known lena dunham, it's happening in overland college in ohio. one instance allegedly included a student apparently seeing a person dressed or so they claimed in a ku klux kl klan-like robe walking near the knauss. >> and someone in what seemed to be kkk paraphernalia walking on a pathway, a pathway that leads to south campus, just like seeing that and having that this is something that's real, that actually happened. >> and it's been going on for a month and started with graffiti and swastikas on the buildings and people getting very upset. >> megyn: there is evident of that. these are some signs posted in recent days and it's no n-word we've blocked out the offensive word. on the right "whites only" and other examples that we'll she
you. and police don't know if these are meant as pranks or driven by bigotry. our next guest is at oberlin a lot and another take. michelle malkin a fox news contributor and a lot of well-known people went to oberlin. lena dunham, from the hit show "girls" and an obama candidate, says it's the first time you want to lose it-- i don't know how she put it, but in any event she's concerned about what's happening on the campus. you were an alalumna and you see it differently. >> i think this is the perfect storm of left wing ideology and while the media jumped to the knee jerk reaction as the administration did, somehow these crimes were perpetrated by people who had animus, when
i was there in the '90s, same types of incidents that happened that turned out to be hate crimes hoaxes and in one instance, there was anti-asian graffiti sprayed across a memorial on campus, and turns out an asian-american student who perpetrated this biased crime in a warped attempt to raise awareness of racism that didn't exist and had to be fabricated. and so, in in case, what you had was over the past week everyone from u.k., to black entertainment television, to the new york times, all piling on after the administration, the faculty, the president published this ostentacious letter that they were canceling classes despite not having any evident that this
was what they claimed it was, a hate crime motivated by anti-minority sentiment on campus. now you've got the police-- >> i want to get to that. because now we showed some of the signs, as you mentioned anti-gay bias, and some read no f-word derrogatory word for gay people. and the question is who is behind it and what's the purpose? and let's just start with the kkk robe that was spotted. you heard the sound bite from the woman saying this is what i saw, but now the police are raising questions about that, michelle. >> that's right. now when you've got people actually on the ground asking questions from eyewitnesses, turns out according to one local report, police are saying the only person spotted with anything remotely looking like a kkk hood was a woman walking around wrapped in a blanket. so is the assault blanket a phantom racism bias that was
possibly mistaken identity here? it's too good to be true or too bad to be true, i think, and the fact that you've got law enforcement saying that they cannot verify this points to, to me, to the many examples, not just at oberlin, i don't want to single out my alma mater, but it's happene many, many times over the decades where things are hatched by progressives who are trying to prove that institutional racism exists in their lives when really, the racism comes from these leftists who are segregating the kids and raising their race consciousness in a very poisonous way. >> megyn: i want to tell the viewers, according to the guardian, the lieutenant from the oberlin police says the only witness to the alleged kkk sighting may have been mistaken. they could not verify the claims and arrested two students, but police say it's unclear if it was motivated by racial hatred or if they just
wanted to make a commentary on free speech. there is a bit of a leaping to conclusions. i mean, people get, you know -- it evokes a viceral reaction when you see the n-word and the f-word and hear about somebody wearing a kkk robe walking by the african center and people jump to these conclusions, but we have to be careful that, i mean, the way you posit in your piece is that identity politics at these campuses may lead you to leap to the wrong conclusion and make a bigger deal out of something that may be not what you're thinking. >> that's right, segregated dorms, segregated academic department. segregated graduation and i think most irresponsibly, faculty and administrators who foster these kind of grievance politics on campus and then leap to their own conclusions. i think this administration needs to be held accountable for going out, patting itself on the back in a sanctimonious
way about the community coming together against the forces of racism, when they will now clam up about the true motivation of these so-called perpetrators. because in one case, there were two students apparently arrested, but they will not now say anything publicly about what they were doing, what their intentions were, and i think what the race and identity politics of these own students were who were responsible for that. >> megyn: michelle, i believe that will conclude the list of things you have in common with lena dunham. just saying that (laughter) thanks for coming on with your perspective. >> thanks. >> megyn: well, today there's growing outrage as thousands of gas stations lower the american flag to honor hugo chavez. we'll show you the reaction as this major chain pays tribute to a man who made a political career out of being unamerican and called our former president the devil. and there are lots of
questions what led a young woman to end up in the lion enclosure in a california animal sanctuary and we're hearing from police what could have prompted the big cat to attack. i've gotine grams of protein. that's three times more than me! [ female announcer ] ensure clear. nine grams protein. zero fat. in blueberry/pomegranate and peach.
to prove to you that aleve is the better choice for him, he's agreed to give it up. that's today? [ male announcer ] we'll be with him all day as he goes back to taking tylenol. i was okay, but after lunch my knee started to hurt again. and now i've got to take more pills. ♪ yup. another pill stop. can i get my aleve back yet? ♪ for my pain, i want my aleve.
>> we're hearing some angry reaction today over the way an oil giant is choosing to mourn the death of venezuelan president hugo chavez, don't forget he's the one who once referred to george bush, our former president, as the devil and who constantly railed on american values and policies and on and on he went. the tribute is coming from citgo stations and that's not a particular surprise since the country is owned by the venezuelan government. that doesn't exactly explain why the company decided to lower the american flag to half staff at its u.s. locations. trace gallagher has the details on the west coast news room, trace. >> reporter: the flags,
megyn, flown at half staff at houston, corpus christi and lake charles. all of those were outraged much the last time flags were at half staff in texas was when neil armstrong died, ironic since hugo chavez once said he didn't believe the united states actually landed on the moon. you mentioned he called george w. bush the devil. he also accused the ideunited states of using a device for the earthquake in haiti. it was intense and sustained. if you look at social network sites, there are some comments supporting the flag at half staff. majority of outraged. citgo released a statement detailing their sense of loss, but nothing about lowering the flag. hugo chavez leaves a legacy of social justice that
transcended geographical boundaries. clearly most people do not believe this even comes close to qualifying and again, citgo, the whole company owned entirely boy the venezuelan government, still no reaction as to why they lowered those flags. >> megyn: all right, trace, thank you. th did the president's 2014 strategy back fire? a look at the pushback on exaggerations over those budget changes that took place last week,starting to anyway. over the president's falling poll numbers and now the sudden change in tone from this administration. plus, we'll look at a bill in one state legislature that aims to cut down on gun violence by requiring anger management classes for anyone who wants to buy any ammunition. and senator rand paul's stance for due process sparks a growing debate over whether the president can legally
order americans killed on u.s. soil. we'll debate that claim and ask senator paul himself about the stand and the message that is now resonating across america. >> always so complacent with our rights that we would allow a president to say he might kill americans, but he will judge the circumstances. he will be the executional in chief if he sees fit. i'm a conservative investor. but that doesn't mean i don't want to make money. i love making money.
i try to be smart with my investments. i also try to keep my costs down. what's your plan? ishares. low cost and tax efficient. find out why nine out of ten large professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which includes investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. read and consider it carefully before investing. risk includes possible loss of principal.
>> developing right now, a deadly storm taking direct aim at communities already devastated by superstorm sandy. along the jersey shore strong surf broke through a temporary dune, water over a coastal highway. new england is bracing for possible evacuations. some areas could see more than a half foot of snow, also wind gusts to 50 miles per hour. we've learned that a fifth death is being blamed on this storm which buried the midwest and mid atlantic before heading to the northeast. a woman was killed in a traffic accident on an icy road in kentucky. less than two months into his second term there's a growing debate over the president winning the 2014 mid term. has he been maneuvering thus far to do just that. "the washington post" and other media outlets thought the upper hand in the budget fight we have been talking about, know how i love that
term, would help the democrats win back the house in 2014 and that's one reason why you've heard the president heaping so much blame on the republicans for those budget changes that did kick in last week. take a look at headlines out there right now, from the washington times. obama poll numbers taking sequester dive. another from "the washington post," did obama cry wolf on sequester. u.s. news and world news report. how did obama bungle the sequester. in politico, obama sequester claims shot down by fact checkers. from cnn, rocky start in second term raises questions about obama approach. >> where are we now? the founder and president of a think tank and advocacy association and former campaign advisor to bill clinton and chris plante, host of the chris plante show. and let me start with you on
this, simon. those are mainstream media outlets and think that the president back fired on this strategy. why are they wrong? >> listen, we've got a long way to go here and i think what the president knows is that the best way to win the mid terms is by governing effectively. the economy is recovering and passes major legislation, then the democrats will do fine in 2014. so, i think that if there's been any change, it's more of a tactical than a strategic one. and what i'm pleased by is that we've stopped-- i think that washington has agreed now that the way we're running this town, which is the president meeting with four legislative leaders, heads of the house and senate and both parties, it was too much -- we needed to get rank and file and rand paul made the speech yesterday and paul ryan met with the president at dinner and others. and i think it's an improvement and glad to see it over the last couple of weeks. >> megyn: i love simon, but that sounds like a dodge and a weave.
(laughter) because i'm wondering about these headlines today, who knows how it's going to go from here, but what the headlines are saying today, chris, is that the president had a strategy and the strategy, as of today has failed. your thoughts? >> well, when you see cnn and the washington post and other news organizations running for cover, i mean, traditionally, happy to carry water for this administration, you know that the white house has a problem that they've got to address. when the poll numbers have he headed south as they have, just in the last week or so, the american people, i think, are waking up to the fact that the president is not leading, that there's nothing, but, you know, partisan truth fighting going on in washington, and believe it or not, the president bears some, if not most of the responsibility for this at this point. the republicans control, you know, 1/2 of1/3 of the government as they're fond of saying, the president is the not leading, he's on vacation, he's playing golf, his
schedule looks like, you know, the schedule of a homeless person on a lot of days, and the news media is finally, at long last, perhaps, recognizing that the president is going to have to step up here and doing something. the president meeting with republicans last night and meeting with republicans today i think is just designed to give his friends in the media the ability to say, see obama is trying, but the republicans are obstructionist. the reality the president came into town with a governing philosophy, elections have consequences, we won, you lost. >> megyn: i don't know about the homeless guy. the homeless guy doesn't get to hang out in the oval office or golf with tiger woods, but your point is that he's got free time on his hands. >> a lot of it. >> megyn: here is a question for you, simon. the reason some of the mainstream media outlets are cracking down on president obama's coming to conclusions, the administration was caught flat-footed on some claims. and politico has an article today talking about the six
sequester claims shot down by the fact checkers, including the president's claim and that of his top aide about the janitors on capitol hill getting less overtime and so on. that got four pinochios from "the washington post." the federal prosecutors going to let criminals go, rated mostly false. and meals on wheels is going to have 4 million fewer meals to serve. two pinochios. teachers getting pink slips, four pinochios, washington post. and children getting kicked off head start. and they overreached and sacrificed credibility in the process, >> i don't really know happened with all that and i think it was clearly a mistake the administration made, but i think it doesn't obscure the fact that sequester is going to have very real consequences and i think that, you know, there was a story today that i read about, you know, border guards not being able to use overtime and so, they're going to be less able to patrol the border region in the country. i think there's going to be
real consequences and you and i discussed last week, megyn, i think the change in this debate now, one of the reasons you've seen paul ryan, for example, praising the president, right, done it several times the last couple of days, i think we're hitting a place of greater reality now what it's going to take to bring the deficit under control. there's going to be both pain, you hear about the republicans talk about pain of tax increases and we're going to hear about the pain of cuts and in many ways we're getting closer to a real solution because i think we're getting to a greater place of reality on this and i'm sure the administration just-- i'm sure you're going to ask me, i'm sure the white house regrets the mistake they made in the representation, but the underlying truth is still there and despite the mistakes they made and the representation of it. >> megyn: but on the poll numbers, chris, if we're getting to a place of greater reality to steal simon's phrase. the poll numbers are showing the people they didn't enjoy the journey and there may have been some damage done to the president's approval rating which has been pretty high since his reelection and now
is down at 46%, which is about a 6%, 6 point drop from a few weeks ago. >> yeah, i mean, the effect is it's generous to describe these things as mistakes or misrepresentations and they were outright falsehoods knowingly orchestrated by the white house with one cabinet official after another peddling the falsehoods to the american people and i think that the american people at this point, even if you're not paying close attention, recognize that we were being sold the sky is falling bill of goods. and it wasn't real. i mean, you know, my mother would have called these things lies, if i were pedalling them and will they have an impact down the line? >> that's up to the president to choose to soften the blow or not and thus far chosen not. so, you know, going forward if we feel the pain, it's going to be because the president made sure that we felt the pain and that's become clear.
so the president is forced to at least start looking like he's being reasonable, if not actually reasonable. >> my mother doesn't like the term lie, but she does assess people on whether or not they have an adult relationship with the truth. (laughter) we'll leave it at that. gentlemen, thank you both so much. >> megyn, congratulations on number three, by the way. >> megyn: thanks much. >> i've got three, i hope you know what you're doing. >> megyn: me, too. (laughter) all right, see you guys. >> good luck. >> good luck. >> thanks, megyn. >> megyn: i need it. up next, we're going to take a closer look at a unique plan to curb gun violence by requiring anger management classes for anyone who wants to buy ammunition. is this common sense? or just plain crazy. dr. keith ablow has some thoughts on that. and the folks who cut the salt from your food and big soft drinks are complaining about ear buds like on your walk-man? oh, did i date myself?
>> new question he today about a florida lawmakers unique approach to curb gun violence. if she gets her way anybody who wants to buy bullets will have to sit through anger management chases. this is the brainchild of senate senator audrey gibson. you have to take a two-hour course and show a certificate of completion before you buy ammo. criticism from gun rights advocates already piling up. dr. keith ablow, the medical a-team, has thoughts on this. she says that people are just more impatient than they used
to be and cites road rage as an example and say they need to be slowed down and have their rage checked before they can be entrusted with deadly mechanisms such as guns and ammo. your thoughts? >> well, she's wrong in so many ways, i'm not sure where to begin. but, first of all, this notion that a two-hour experience is going to impact someone with an impulse control disorder who might shoot someone because they're mentally ill is the reason we're in the bad shape we are in the mental health care system, from listening to people like this, who make no sense. this is a state senator, i can't believe she was elected. secondly, the bottom line if you're going to do this, you're going to have to state as parents anyone who wants to have bullets, how about tbuying alcohol. surely she'd understand more violence is committed under the influence of alcohol than by handguns.
so i guess you would have a prescription for americans who drink and prescription for americans who drive since car violence, especially drinking and driving, is also a score in this country. and bottom line, it's a personal responsibility issue. it's not her decision whether people buy bullets, whether they buy a car, whether they drink alcohol or shouldn't be. >> megyn: i know you believe, if you watch this debate play out, as a psychiatrist you look at this and say look, there are lawmakers genuinely trying to address the violence that we've seen in this country, perpetrated by individuals who in some instances choose guns and their weapon. but i know you believe there are other politicians out there who have different motives who you say want to posture and just make noise. what do you mean by that? and which category does she fall into in your judgment? >> we need real solutions to the very real problems that face us. when he we talk about aurora,
colorado, when we talk about newtown, connecticut, we're talking about violence committed by mentally ill people in a nation in which the mental health care system has all been dissolved. we need to rebuild it. then we're faced with grandstanders like this state senator from florida who just want to make noise. they just want to be noticed and so what is she saying? the way to end violence committed with guns, which by the way is often committed by people who are mentally ill, to give them a two hour mini course if you're buying bullets. that will solve it. now, why wouldn't she be laughed out of office? why don't americans find that kind of fiction morally repugnant that she would take us for fools? for people who are going to invest in that? that's her idea? she's an elected official and that's what she's here to tell us from the state house? that's an embarrassment. >> you know, earlier this week, we had a rape survivor on the program named amanda collins and she had testified before the colorado
legislature on her belief as to why students need to be able to have concealed carry on campuses in colorado. she was the victim of a rape in nevada. and she had a concealed carry permit, but wasn't allowed to take it on campus and that's where she got raped. she gave this heart felt testimony before the state legislature and a state senator aimed edie hudak gave this response. i want to get your reaction. >> i want to say that statistics are not on your side, even if you had a gun. >> and senator-- >> just wait. >> says that for every-- for every one woman who used a handgun to kill someone in self-defense, 83 were murdered by that. >> respectfully, senator, you weren't there. i know without a doubt in my mind at some point i would have been able it to stop my attack by using my firearm. he had a weapon of his own.
he didn't need mine. >> megyn: what do you make of that? >> what i make of that, the data, may support the fact when you draw a firearm, you put yourself in harm's way in another way, that doesn't mean that you don't have a firearm. it might mean we train people to use them better and to be more expert at using them. it also neglects a basic fact. it's not up to this representative, this government official to make a decision for every woman in america, this is the kind of statement as a parent drives me to great anger, the bottom line, who suggested to this representative that she ought to make the decision for every potential rape victim in the country about how and when and why they defend themselves. >> megyn: and-- >> who anointed her that. >> megyn: in florida the senate senator we've been discussing audrey gibson, her idea about anger management classes before buying ammo, getting people to think about how much ammunition they really need and that we've heard that from so many lawmakers about how this is a
discussion in which ultimately it would be the state that would decide how much protection you need or don't need. i'll give you the last word. >> hudak and gibson should call each other and congratulate one another on this. they've sent out a message of disempowerment to people by the hundreds of thousands or more. they told people who want to defend themselves and have autonomy that they must be mentally ill and they told women if they have it in mind to do that, rather than getting the requisite training their firearms properly to prevent rape, that they ought to just, i guess, live through it, try to survive it, because it's going to happen. how did these people get elected? >> dr. keith ablow, always great getting your perspective. thank you. >> thank you. >> megyn: and one note we invited state senator audrey gibson on and she wasn't able to make it, but welcome anytime.
a woman gets a job with wild animals and one week later she's killed. what went on moments before the lion attacked. stay with us. zap technology. departure. hertz gold plus rewards also offers ereturn-- our fastest way to return your car. just note your mileage and zap ! you're outta there ! we'll e-mail your receipt in a flash, too. it's just another way you'll be traveling at the speed of hertz.
>> a big story developing in california today about tragedy in a wild life park. an intern who loved animals thought she got her dream job. yesterday it it came to a terrible end. diana hanson was attacked and killed by an african lion and now investigators are trying to figure out what went wrong. clauda cowan has the latest. >> reporter: megyn, i just got off the phone with diana's brother paul hanson, his sister loved big cats all her life and thrilled to start a six month internship. working with lions, tigers and animals and can't understand
why diana broke the rules and went into the lion's enclosure when she knew the animal could kill her. by all accounts, diana spent a lot of time around this lion known as cous cous, during the time she had been working at the research facility located near fresno. the african male arrived four years ago as a cub and no reports he'd attacked anyone before. according to diana's father, this lion was his daughter's favorite and she was disappointed that the rules there prevented her from getting into his cage. >> i don't know why in the world she had he' be in the cage because that was, she told me only the owner was allowed to be in the cage. only the lion and tigers cage she said the workers were forbidden from ever going into. >> reporter: the facility was closed at the time of the the only other worker there tried to distract the lion so paramedics could help diana who was severely injured when they arrived. finally, they had to kill the
lion to reach her, but it was too late and diana died at the scene. according to park workers no one is supposed to go into the cage alone with the cat and that lion in particular was only handled or fed by the park's founder dale anderson. aside from the tearful statement yesterday expressing his condolences to diana's family anderson is not speaking publicly. we may hear more from the sheriff's department later today. meantime, megyn, the park remains closed until further notice. >> megyn: all right, clauda, thank you. the deadly attack at a u.s. wild life sanctuary raises questions. and kelly's court, the fallout. and like a scene straight out of the scene "mr. smith goes to washington" and rand paul's filibuster and what he views as a threat to our liberty and the unique reaction from the left and the right. plus, we'll look at the battle
being waged over ear buds in the big apple. the barrelful? e carful? how about...by the bowlful? campbell's soups give you nutrition, energy, and can help you keep a healthy weight. campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do. but i'm still stubbed up. [ male announcer ] truth is, nyquil doesn't unstuff your nose. what? [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus liquid gels speeds relief to your worst cold symptoms plus has a decongestant for your stuffy nose. thanks. that's the cold truth! from capital one... boris earns unlimited rewards for his small business. can i get the smith contract, ease? thank you. that's three new paper shredders. [ boris ] put 'em on my spark card. [ garth ] boris' small business earns 2% cash back on every pchase every day. great businesses deserve unlimited rewards. read back the chicken's testimony, please. "buk, buk, bukka!" [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose 2% cash back or double miles on every purchase every day. told you i'd get half. what's in your walle
it's a challenge to balance work and family. ♪ that's why i love adt. i can see what's happening at my business from anywhere. ♪ [ male announcer ] now manage and help protect your small business remotely with adt. arm and disarm your alarm, watch secure video in real time, and even adjust your lights and thermostat wherever you are. with adt, you get 24/7 protection through our exclusive fast response monitoring. you can be confident that adt islways there for you. hey, lisa. is that the delivery we've been waiting for? [ male announcer ] and now during the adt get growing sale, get adt installed starting at just $99. [ woman ] i love the convenience of adt. i can finally be in two places at once. [ male announcer ] call today to get adt installed starting at just $99. hurry. this sale ends march 9th. adt. always there.
>> fox news alert on new fallout after kentucky senator rand paul mounts a dramatic nearly 13-hour filibuster in what is called a unique moment in political history. that is now winning praise from both sides of the aisle. that's where we begin this brand new hour of america live. i'm megyn kelly. rand paul speaking for hours and hours during an old-fashioned filibuster, blocking the confirmation of john brennan in an effort to obama administration's refusal to rule out a drone strike on an american citizen on american soil. senator paul held the floor for most of the day at times talking more than three hours nonstop. he had help from fellow
senators. in a rare political moment not seen in years, well, watch what happened. >> i rise today to begin to filibuster john brennan's nomination for the cia. i will speak until i can no longer speak. >> i'd like to ask your reactions to the testimony of the attorney general. >> senator from kansas without yielding the floor if i can. >> most americans would find it row pull seive-- >> mr. president at this time i would entertain a question without yielding the floor from the senator of oregon. >> of an extraordinary threat to our country. >> yield, without yielding the floor for another question. >> and this will probably be my last question before i get to it let me just say that all the other senators, i know some-- >> i have no problem if you want to talk a long time. a time or two like that in my days. >> mr. president obama i'd like to thank the senator from texas coming to the floor and cheering me up. i was getting kind of tired
and i appreciate big news from the outside world. >> we don't want to have a standard who someone who we think might be a terrorist or who we think might be engaged in something eating dinner in a restaurant would be killed. >> it's not a republican question, it's not a-- >> remove myself from the blockage of john brennan's nomination as soon as we get clarification from the white house. absolutely, we're not going to be killing americans, not in a combat situation, we will obey the constitution. the fifth amendment applies to all americans and there are no exceptions. thank you so much for the forebearance and i field the floor. >> and the applause began. joining us senator rand paul. i hope you've had rest now and i want to start, on the topic
of using drones here on american soil, it's never happened and no one is threatening to do it. in fact, they're saying it's entirely hypothetical and would be extremely unusual that the scenario would even come up. so why make an issue out of it? >> well, you know, the oath of office for the president says i will protect and defend the constitution. it doesn't say i intend to, when it's convenient, and this administration has talked about selective application of the fifth amendment. drone strikes overseas are often done to people in noncombat situations, in restaurants, walking on the street, in cars and in their house while they sleep. that's not the kind of standard we can have in our country. if you're sitting in a cafe, i don't care who you're e-mailing or what you're talking about, if they think you were associated with terrorism, you need to be arrested and you need to get your day in court. this is a fundamental american freeman and that's what we're fighting for around the world. if we give up on that, i think we've done a great disservice
to those who are defending our country. >> megyn: there's a distinction of terrorists who are al-qaeda want to kill us and overseas drones. and the only american we've intentionally killed overseas is anwar al-awlaki and there was quite a bit of efforts about his willingness and operation to kill americans. and in that instance the president had announced that, and people had filed lawsuits about it and so on. you know, and so it was a -- it wasn't some secret plan to kill an american here on american soil using a drone. >> it's a different situation, it will be different overseas than it will be here. it's different in the battlefield than it will be here which comes precisely to the argument the republicans say well, the battlefield is everywhere, there is no limitation. president obama says this and some members of my party say the battlefield has no geographic limitations and the law of war applies. it's important to know that the law of war they're talking about means no due process and
i agree with that in a battle. when someone is shooting at you, you don't ask for-- they don't get miranda rights or a trial, you shoot them. when anybody is actively attacking you, you're allowed to repulse that with lethal authority. however, if they're not engaged in combat and if they're in the united states, i don't think that the law of war applies to the united states. the police act differently in the united states than the military acts overseas. there's different rules of engagement. i don't want to give up on the procedural constitutional protection that we have to all of the amendments, particularly the fifth and sixth amendment. jury trial is an important thing. arrest, be charged, determining your guilt, these are important things, we can't leave that up to one politician to decide guilty or innocence. >> megyn: as now, there's a history in our country of having to make decisions like this. when you first wrote to the attorney general expressing concerns whether we might use
a drone on u.s. soil. he wrote back in hypothetical imagery circumstance something might be possible if necessary to protect the homeland. in circumstances of a catastrophic attack, for example, pearl harbor or what happened on 9/11. on 9/11 the fourth plane that the brave passengers brought down in shanksville, pennsylvania. vice-president cheney with the okay of president bush had authorized that plane to be shot down and that would have killed a whole lot of american civilians to save thousands of lives. i mean, why would you tell this president that he doesn't have that authority if something else would happen. >> i'm not. i'm not saying he doesn't have that authority. we're talking about targeted drone attacks on individual american citizens. i have never argued that the president doesn't have the right to make immediate decisions to protect our country from attack when it's an imminent attack like that, f-16's were scrambling, i have no opposition to that. so, attorney general holder answered a question we weren't asking.
we're talking about targeting strikes of individuals. we're talking about john smith who is eating in a cafe in seattle that happens to be also e-mailing a cousin of his who lives in the middle east, and that cousin, someone has determined, might be a terrorist. now, he is associated with terrorism, does the country or the president get to decide, oh, he's an enemy combatant and he gets no lawyer, he gets no trial? his guilt i think is up to discussion and you shouldn't drop a drone strike on him and you shouldn't target an american citizen. we have a tough time sometimes. if you've ever been to a jury trial, it's not always easy to determine innocence and guilt. if you're not lifting an arm against your country, if you're sitting in a cafe unarmed you should be arrested like any other criminal, but you can't be killed with a targeted missile strike and the president has been asked directly about this and he's evaded the question. he's not answered are you going to target american citizens on american soil. he said, well, we might have
different rules outside than inside. and i said for goodness sakes you better, but i really can't condition receive of targeting americans. this has nothing to do with repulsing attacks, this has to do with targeting individual people not involved in combat. that's what we've asked him to answeren i think that they've given an answer to the media, but we haven't received it yet. >> megyn: i don't know if you're referring to the letter. we got it three minutes before it came on addressed to you. >> apparently they sent it to you guys before they sent it to us. >> megyn: let me be the first it read to you, from the attorney general of the jiets directed to you, dear senator paul it's come to my attention that you've now asked an additional question, does the president have the authority to use a weaponized drone to kill an american not engaged in combat on american soil. the answer to that question is no. sincerely, eric holder. >> hurray for 13 hours yesterday we asked him that question and so there is a result and a victory under
duress, and under public humiliation, the white house will respond and do the right thing. it took a month and a half to get them to admit that the cia doesn't operate in the united states. that's been the law since 1947. so now after 13 hours of filibuster we're proud to announce that the president is not going to kill unarmed americans on american soil. my next question would be why did it take so long, why is it so hard? and why would a president so jealously guard power that they're afraid to say this? but i am glad and i think that answer does -- that question, the answer does answer my question. >> megyn: we talked in our last hour before you came on, what extraordinary thing you did in uniting senators like john cornyn of texas a conservative, marco rubio of florida along with aclu and code pink all standing on the same side on an issue, but it wasn't unanimous and this partisan factions on this, they divided in an unexpected
way. some other republicans, including john mccain and lindsey graham were not so happy with what they witnessed from you yesterday, suggesting you've done a disservice to americans. i want you to hear some of what they've said and give you a chance to respond. >> we've done a, i think, a disservice to a lot of americans by making them believe that somehow they're in danger from their government. they're not, but we are in danger, we are in danger from a dedicated, longstanding easily replaceable leadership enemy that is hellbent on our destruction. >> he wants this president to tell him that he will not use a drone to kill an american citizen sitening a cafe, having a cup of coffee, who is not a combatant. i find the question offensive. >> megyn: two points there. number one, they suggest you're focused on the wrong danger. number two, they think you're
demeaning the office of the presidency. your thoughts? >> the reason the question is asked is precisely because of the near is behind senator mccain and graham's logic. they think the whole world is is a battlefield, including america, and that the laws of war should apply. the laws of war don't involve due process. so, senator graham has been very explicit on the floor to say when they ask you for attorney you tell them to shut up. that's my understanding the way america works, not the way i understand an american would be accused of a crime would tell them if you want a lawyer to shut up. so i don't think the laws of war apply to america, i think the bill of rights do and i think it's a disservice to our soldiers that we have senators up there arguing that the bill of rights aren't important. this is a very serious question. it was a question that took me a month and a half to get an answer to and so i would argue, and i think that a lot of the public would agree with me, both on the right and the left, that what we asked was a
very serious question and it's a question that i think we finally got an answer to, so the president apparently thought it was a serious enough question to answer. >> megyn: last-- sorry, apologies, we're wrapping up. i know you got tired, stood for 12 hours, couldn't take bathroom breaks. anything you would do differently if you did it again. >> i would have eat and bigger breakfast. i hadn't planned on doing it until we walked in that moment and you never know whether the floor will be open. usually the floor is sort of held captive by the majority party and won't let you get up there and talk, let you talk for specified times. so i was fortunate that the floor was open and that i had an issue i cared passionately about and i think it's a good idea for the country to have a real debate sometimes about does the bill of rights apply? some of the questions aren't easy. it's about terrorism, too, so, does the bill of rights apply and when does it apply, a significant question. >> megyn: good thing you had that candy desk, little known candy desk in the u.s. senate
you can't believe the lame-stream media, gary. they're all gone. maybe i'll get one. you can't have the same car as me, gary! i'm gettin' one. nope! [ male announcer ] volkswagen springtoberfest is here and there's no better time to get a passat. that's the power of german engineering. right now lease one of four volkswagen models for under $200 a month. visit vwdealer.com today.
>> some interesting new polling on potential 2016 presidential field today. and quinnipiac university pitted democrat hillary clinton in some hypothetical match-ups. new jersey governor chris christie would fare the best against mrs. clinton, but, it doesn't look like he would win as of today. standing up against 37% to 45. and against paul ryan, mrs. clinton said 58 to-- and marco rubio, 34% to mrs. clinton's 50's. she's got decades more name recognition, but what does it mean in the presidential race 2016. doug schoen, pollster, and
monica crowley, a fox news contributor. sadly not too early to be discussing this and talking how on the democratic side and the republican side, people are starting to vy, for attention, money, and so on, and rand paul, some thought that was all an ruse, a bit to get attention and name recognition. doug, you used to work with the clinton administration. >> she's a front runner, 50%, 50% or undecided or not supporting her. she's not unbeatable, but in a very strong and very powerful position and i think she'll clear the field, megyn, if in fact she decides to run. >> if she says she wants in, you don't think we'll have joe biden running, andrew cuomo running? >> i don't think we're going to have anyone running on the democratic side if and when hillary clinton says she's in the race. >> really? do you agree with that, no challenger. >> andrew cuomo and joe biden, ambitious people, they may get
in the race doesn't mean this'll get the nomination. i agree with doug fshe gets in she gets it. she will have huge advantages. far out hard to tell, four years and counting, but anything could happen. the economy could implode, could have god forbid a terrorist-- but right new, the disadvantage for the republicans in 2016 last time around in 2008 they ran against a first, which is the first black candidate. if hillary runs, they will be at the disadvantage of running against another first, the first woman. >> megyn: and someone who has a last name beloved in the democratic party and still beloved by some more moderate republicans who think that president clinton was a great president. she's got that advantage and the goodwill department, doug, but taken a little bit after hit lately with benghazi and her approval ratings are high, but how much does that hurt her and how much does the president, the current president right now approval rating is falling, but his performance in the next three years, how much does that effect her? >> on your last point, megyn,
monica is exactly right. if the democratic party sinks, and sinks precipitously because of the president dropping in support, that would hurt secretary clinton. the "but" is to her benefit, the republicans are so low he now in the polls, that she benefits from a republican brand that's almost toxic at this point. and so, a lot can happen of course. >> what about chris christie, it's interesting to me that he is the front runner among these other republican standard bearers because he's taken so much flak from the republican party lately and he gave obama the bear hug in the wake of the hurricane, and he's made some comments on guns and other issues that have led to some consternation on the republican side, not cpac and so on. can he get the nomination on the republican side. >> anything can happen. >> they'll forgive and forget. >> chris christie wants to win as a blue state, as a republican landslide in november. it looks like if the polling holds up he probably will accomplish that.
that will give him a huge leg up going into the primary process. the problem is for chris christie, there are so many other really dynamic young conservatives that will also likely get into the race. you mentioned rand paul, marco rubio, susanna martinez, scott walker. >> megyn: they're not on the board-- >> and conservatives with primaries and don't trust chris kchristie. >> did they learn their lesson. i'm not saying they haven't come to the right conclusion, but in the republican party whether that primary process is with the best candidate. >> and the bipartisanship chris christie showed during sandy and equally clear the conservatives haven't learned their lesson in the republican party. if nominate somebody who is ideologically pure, not likely
they'll win. chris christie is their best bet. >> megyn: before chris christie made the controversial statements he was the darling of the republican party. begging him to run and he decided not to. and mitt romney was more moderate and take positions farther to the right to get the nod, but there are republicans, conservatives who r s say don't make the mistake twice. we had mccain, romney and we don't want another moderate. we have a die-hard conservative-- >> we've run into that, bob dole, john mccain, mitt romney, we continue to run moderates and they continue to lose so the calculation might be, hey, let's go for a really principled conservative this time, and that might be a big challenge for chris christie, if you asked chris christie, are you happy with being the front runner he might say i don't want to be the front runner this early out. remember, hillary was ahead and out of nowhere came barack obama. >> megyn: great discussion. >> thank you. >> megyn: we finished the
corporation with senator paul and some suggesting he's a hero and some a heel. five minutes away. new worries that the food police are coming for your head phones. hey, our salads. [ bop ] [ bop ] [ bop ] you can do that all you want, i don't like v8 juice. [ male announcer ] how about v8 v-fusion. a full serving of vegetables, a full serving of fruit. but what you taste is the fruit. so even you... could've had a v8.
>> well, a new crusade for the mayor who has cracked down on smoking, trans fats and super sized sugary drinks, now new york city mayor michael bloomberg is launching a campaign against your head phones, especially loud noise at that come from the ear buds on people's mp3 players, trace? >> reporter: we should start by menninging, mayor bloomberg is not planning to yank out your ear phones with the two liter cokes, trans fats and junk food.
this is more campaigns the risks of long and loud listening. using facebook, twitter, social media to get the message out and targeting the ipod generation, right? the first generation that actually does what you see on the screen there, insert the head phones directly into the ears. here is a little reaction. >> i think that's a good idea because as we get older, it can mess up our hearing. >> it's something that needs to be addressed, but up to the individual whether they want to play the music or not. >> reporter: researchers say that ipods at max level can reach 116 decibels, 85 is what they consider safe. the new york health department says hearing loss among teens rising rapidly and 1988 the dawn of the walkman generation. now, noise reduction clearly has been one of mayor bloomberg's key quality of life issues and he started that silent night music and
jackhammers and wants to go inside your head and lower the volume little bit. critics by the way, mostly haven't weighed in and haven't heard what we're saying, the head phones are too loudly. inside the ears, my kids do it. i guess not good for you. >> megyn: you know what next. >> reporter: what ooh. >> megyn: the anchor ear pieces and he's worried about the anchors and reporters. >> reporter: can he stop the producer from saying wrap, wrap!. >> megyn: you know, i'll share with the viewer what they're saying. you're on the anchor desk and doing the show and they press the button if they want to talk to you and press the button and hear-- ahhh! in the background. what's going on? what's happening in the control room? nothing. everything's fine. thanks, trace. >> reporter: sure. >> megyn: i've done it before where you go on really long, red wrap! like they really
mean it. not saying anything now. very red wrap. got to move on. also creating controversy, planned parenthood is furious over an ad campaign intend today discourage teen pregnancy. we'll show you what they hate about this message. and did senator rand paul really do a disservice to the country with his 13-hour filibuster? that's what two of america's best known republicans are saying about their fellow republican, a libertarian, and that debate is next. >> he has not answered are you going to target american citizens on american soil? he said, well, we might have different rules outside than inside and i said for goodness sakes you better. but i can't conceive him targeting americans. when you have diabetes...
[ male announcer ] glucerna hunger smart. ( bell rings ) they remwish i saw mine of my granmore often, but they live so far away. i've been thinking about moving in with my daughter and her family. it's been pretty tough since jack passed away. it's a good thing you had life insurance through the colonial penn program. you're right. it was affordable, and we were guaranteed acceptance. guaranteed acceptance? it means you can't be turned down because of your health. you don't have to take a physical or answer any health questions. they don't care about your aches and pains. well, how do you know? did you speak to alex trebek? because i have a policy myself. it costs just $9.95 a month per unit.
it's perfect for my budget. my rate will never go up. and my coverage will never go down because of my age. affordable coverage and guaranteed acceptance? we should give them a call. do you want to help protect your loved ones from the burden of final expenses? if you're between 50 and 85, you can get quality insurance that does not require any health questions or a medical exam. your rate of $9.95 a month per unit will never increase, and your coverage will never decrease -- that's guaranteed. so join the six million people who have already called about this insurance. whether you're getting new insurance or supplementing what you already have, call now and ask one of their representatives about a plan that meets your needs. so, what are you waiting for? go call now! we'll finish up here.
>> fox news alert and live to washington. where president obama is signing and speaking about the violence against women act that's just been passed by a bipartisan congress. obviously, the republicans control the house and the democrats and the senate and this is something that the president had pushed hard for. let's take a listen. >> violence against women act is something i've called for in my state of the union address and when i see how quick it's got done, i'm -- i'm -- (applause) >> makes me feel optimistic.
because of this bill we'll keep in place all the protections and services that joe described. and as he said, we'll expand them to cover even more women because this is a country where everybody should be able to pursue their own measure of happiness and live their lives free from fear no matter who you are, no matter who you love. that's got to be our priority. that's what today is about. [applaus [applause] >> today is about the millions of women, the victims of domestic abuse and sexual assault who are out there right now looking for a lifeline, looking for support. because of this bill, they'll continue to have access to all the services that joe first helped establish 19 years ago, national hotline, network of shelters, protection orders that carry across state lines. and because of this bill, we're also expanding housing assistance so that no woman has to choose between a
violent home and no home at all. that's what today is all about. today is about all the law enforcement officials, like police chief jim johnson. [applause]. they're the first to respond when a victim calls for help. because this bill, we're continuing all the training and support that's proven so effective in bridging, you know, some gaps that were in actual enforcement law that we can actually bring more offenders to justice. and we're giving our law enforcement better tools, to investigate cases of rape, which remains a consistently underreported crime in our country. helping police officers deliver on the most important part of their job, preventing harm and saving lives, that's what today is all about. today's about women like diane. i'm so grateful, diane, you
shared your story. that takes great courage and tragically, it's a common sto story. i know we've got travel leaders here today and thank you for fighting so hard on behalf of your people to make this bill a reality. [applause] now, indian country the highest rates of abuse in america, and one reason, when a native american an attacked, the is immune by prosecution by tribal courts, as soon as i sign this bill, that ends. that ends.
[applaus [applause] >> that ends. tribal governments have an inherent right to protect their people and all women deserve the right to live free from fear and that's what today is all about. today is about all the americans who face discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender when they seek help. [applause]. so i want to thank sharon shapell who is here, where did she go? there she is right here, for the work she's doing. great work she's doing with the anti-violence project. but sharon and all the other advocates that are focused on this community they can't do it alone and now they won't have to and that's what today is all about.
that's what today is all about. [applaus [applause] >> today is about the women who come to rosie looking for support. immigrants who are victims of domestic abuse. [applause] >> i mean, imagine the dilemma for so many, you know, if your immigration status is tied to a husband who beats you or abuses you, if you're an undocumented immigrant you may feel there's too much to lose by coming forward. the violence against women's act already had protections so that women could call police without fear of deportation and those protections save lives and because we fought hard for nthem to stay in place they remain a lifeline for women. that's part of what today is all about.
[applause] today is about young women like thai brought into the sex trade by a neighbor when she was 12 years old. >> megyn: president obama on a day that he pushed hard for it and they mentioned getting the violence against women act signed and you heard him mentioning among many things it will do is trying to push through the backlog of those rape kits that we've seen in so many jurisdictions where they take dna with the hopes that some day when someone in the future gets arrested they can check it against that dna. in any event, in part, this will try to push those through and checks on those through as well as provide more adequate protections for women who finds themselves the victims of domestics or other violence. if you care to watch the remainder of the president's remarks they will be streaming live on foxnews.com. >> . >> if you're not lifting an arm against your country, if you're sitening a cafe unarmed
you should be arrested like any other criminal, but you can't be killed with a targeted missile strike and the president has been asked directly about this and he's evaded the question. he has not answered are you going to target american citizens on american soil, he said, well, we might have different rules outside than inside. and i said for goodness sakes you better. but i can't conceive him targeting americans. >> megyn: that's rand paul from kentucky speaking here moments ago on "america live," explaining his 13-hour filibuster to protest the obama administration's controversial drone policy. senator paul's stand for due process is sparking a fierce debate over whether president obama has the legal power to kill an american on u.s. soil without arrest or charges. and now, some republicans are asking whether the senator was even asking a fair question or whether it was in fact offensive. bernard whitman, a former
inch-- ceo of whitman insight strategies and beth ferguson radio, and the show. and the response by the attorney general, the president does not have the authority to use a drone to kill an american not engaged in combat on american soil and he was very happy that that was the answer. so there's no authority use today kill an american not engaged in combat here on american soil. why did we just have this huge dust-up, this long filibuster so we could get this? >> you should have asked. >> megyn: this one line from eric holder after he wrote another letter? what's going on here, bernard? >> i think the last thing the american people need is another example why our system of government does not work properly so that rand paul, one senator out of a hundred, can hold up the nation's business for an entire day so he can get an answer to a question that frankly, shouldn't be publicly debated. i don't know why or when the
american people have somehow believed and i don't think they do, but certainly this senator does, that we should have a discussion and a debate about defense and national security policy aired before the entire public. and that's-- >> and that was-- >> that's classified and confidential and we are in fact at a time of war. >> megyn: but before i get, before you weigh in, the patriot act with president bush national security ranked much higher on the list of americans priorities back then than now. right now they care about the economy, jobs, the deficit, spending, i mean, they care about cell phone use in public. trying to think what else was on the list, but this was not on it. but this was a simple questioned asked weeks ago that should have been able to have been answered because it was not an issue of national security. it was an issue of if bob is sitting down the street and he's having a cup of coffee, do you have the right to kill him with a drone strike? that to me is a simple enough question that should have been answered with this letter six weeks ago and we would have
never gotten here. the point is this is what the american people don't like. they don't like that the people in charge think that they somehow don't have to answer basic questions that they should be able to ask. and somehow, if they don't want to answer it, then you're somehow not an american, you're not a patriot, and you don't understand national security and i think the question he asked was totally fair game. >> megyn: he's gotten the answer he wants, bernard, but let me ask you this, do you believe it, do you believe that eric holder or president obama will feel bound to this piece of paper if some terrorist, somebody they believe is a terrorist is sitening starbucks and there are 15 other people in the starbucks, law abiding citizens that, that guy is about to walk out with a bomb and only way of taking him out, they believe, to kill innocents to protect thousands of others. >> i suspect by the military and by the administration, as someone engaged in enemy combatant-- >> but the others around him will be innocent americans--
you have to weigh the risk to troops and casualties. the drone program is extraordinary success and decimate the leader of al-qaeda. and have there unfortunately been casualties among viflions. >> yes. >> is it worth the threat to our troops and other civilians? >> that's mostly al-qaeda and not american civilians. this is the hypocrisy, these are the guys that said we should give the rights to the terrorists and try them. now they act if this question is somehow ridiculous or off limits when they were advocating for treating known terrorists who were in fact threats to america, who in fact planned to kill americans as american citizens. >> megyn: this is why some people actually believe that rand paul may have hurt the republican band because he made president obama look tough on terror and democrats
have struggled to appear. >> not resently. four in five americans approve of the drone program and the public is decidedly behind the president. and it ultimately saves lives and it protects americans. look, i don't think any of us want to think about the fact that someone could be killed by a drone strike while sitting in a cafe. i think the odds of that happening as someone engaged in that is very, very low. the fact is if there is an imminent threat that could lead to catastrophic loss of life maybe that might be actually necessary and the letter-- >> the-- if that person is american, that letter is not going to save you, nor should it. >> it's a legitimate question that should have been asked and people that ask about drones, have an argument and dealing with it it outside the united states of america. i guarantee you 80% of americans would not be in favor of someone being able to be targeted an american citizen sitting in a starbucks, i don't think they would go there. i think if they understood the
we were out when it happened. by the time we called the police, there wasn't much they could do. i felt so helpless. we were out when it happened. but adt quickly called the police. i felt like it was over right away. feels like it's still not over. we lost our digital photos, financial records, things that insurance simply can't replace. [ male announcer ] you can't predict when bad things will happen. but you can help protect yourself with the fast-alarm reonse of adt. we're always there for your family. with more monitoring centers, more ways to keep up with life at home. and 24/7 monitoring against burglary, fire, and high levels of carbon monoxide. starting at just over $1 a day. call now and get adt installed for just $99. isn't your family worth america's number-one security company? i wish i had adt. i'm glad we had adt. [ male announcer ] get adt installed for just $99. and ask about adt pulse,
advanced home management here today. adt. always there. >> kelly's court is in session and a young intern at a wild life sanctuary killed at a wild life sanctuary. this was cous cous, and diana hanson, the 24-year-old killed. now, questions how diana ended up inside the enclosure with the lion. joining me now, mercedes colwin and david, a defense attorney and diana's family speaking through her father, expressing remorse that this happened and she died loving what she loved to do taking care of the big cats. and nonetheless, the odds are someone is going to file a lawsuit? >> certainly will, her family
will. they'll say wait a minute how is it that the volunteer has access to the enclosures? lions are the fourth most dangerous animals in the world and why are they having any access, where are the keys held, what kind of training. they have a fact sheet on the website and talk about the big cats in their website, in the fact sheets, is that their cats are tractable, they're not-- they're tractable, we can read the cat's behavior and know whether they can enter the enclosure and work with the cats. why are you advertising this? anybody that works there has some false sense of security with the animals. >> well, but david, if her family does ultimately decide to sue the sanctuary, they're going to have a problem, because the father's gone on record as saying, his daughter knew she was not supposed to go into that cage with the lion, this is sound bite number two, listen to her father. >> don't know why in the world she'd ever be in such a lion's cage.
i can't think of why she would do that unless she wanted to have contact with the lions like she did up in billingham, i don't know why in the world she had h'd be in the cage beca she told he me only the owner was allowed to be in the cage and only the lion and tigers cage, she said the workers were forbidden from ever going into. >> david? >> yeah, i mean, that's absolutely right. megyn, she knew that, she'd established a bond with this lion and megyn, california law t liability for anyone who owns or possesses wild animals for injury or death because there's a big exception and that exception is assumption of the risk of injury, which it appears is exactly what she did. instead of feeding the lion in a separate cage, backing out, closing the cage and allowing the lion to come in and eat, she frankly just went in there, in this sort of, you know, bonding with nature thing, youtube is full of the videos, lions, tigers and bears cuddling with human
beings and people get the impression they can do that. >> megyn: we don't know for sure yet. >> we don't know. >> megyn: the opposite side of the break. aw this is tragic man, investors just like you could lose tens of thousands of dollars on their 401(k) to hidden fees. thankfully e-trade has low cost investments and no hidden fees. but, you know, if you're still bent on blowing this fat stack of cash, there's a couple of ways you could do it. ♪ ♪ or just go to e-trade and save it. boom.
>> the father's testimonial that his daughter told him she knew she wasn't allowed to be in the cage and only the owner would go in there. and guidelines which say that care givers, does that look at the lawsuit. >> saying i was grief stricken, so upset and lost my daughter in a horrific way and not under oath. he can try to defeat it and probably confronted with it at some formal proceedings in court, but somehow he can get around it if he really does want to. doesn't-- >> the thing is though, david, that a woman who runs the
jungle jennie foundation said she had been in the lion's cage before herself. accompanied by a park worker, i don't know if it's the owner. but if they can establish a precedence despite the guidelines and admonition for the owner of this happening then that could potentially expose them? >> that could, megyn, there could be a waiver established. if they had one written policy and then practiced something else, i mean, agree completely. if there were possibly a requirement this were more supervisors there, and-- >> could be 20-year-old women there and this girl died and another woman in his 20's, that was it and park was closed and-- mercedes another case a couple of years ago, 2007 or so out of san francisco zoo, where three boys were there, one was killed, two others sued and that wound up settling, but is there any sort of a crackdown now on these facilities who harbored these animals which are inherently dangerous at
the top of the food chain and predictable behavior? >> great point, our firm actually represented the san francisco zoo and the partners represented the zoo and frankly, it is that. we have to protect not only the animals, but obviously t the-- what type of training do you give any volunteer that in this particular case the volunteers, but access how large when you have these moats where the cats are, and how many moments do you have? not many. >> megyn: you need to protect the workers and you need to protect the animals. this cat did what lions do. >> exactly. >> here is this facility passed several numerous inspections five times. >> megyn: something went wrong on this day and. thank you so much, we'll be right back.